Strand Bookstore to Pay $1.5 Million After Ineligible Pandemic Loan Settlement

The Strand Bookstore’s $1.5 Million Repayment Agreement

The Strand Book Store, a New York City cultural institution, has agreed to pay back nearly $1.5 million to the federal government following an investigation into its participation in pandemic-era financial relief programs. As reported by the Associated Press, the U.S. Department of Justice announced the settlement this Tuesday, noting that the bookstore had received funds from the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) despite being ineligible due to the ownership status of Nancy Bass Wyden, the wife of U.S. Senator Ron Wyden, a Democrat from Oregon.

The controversy centers on a second-draw loan of $932,350 obtained in 2021. While the initial PPP loan received by the Strand in 2020 did not carry restrictions regarding Congressional connections, a subsequent law passed in December 2020 explicitly barred businesses from accessing the second round of funding if a member of Congress or their spouse held a significant controlling interest. According to the Oregon Capital Chronicle, the U.S. Attorney’s office for the District of Columbia described the certification Bass Wyden signed at the time—attesting that the store met all necessary qualifications—as “knowingly and materially false.”

📣 We need your help. This is the post we hoped to never write, but today marks a huge turning point in The Strand's history. Our revenue has dropped nearly 70% compared to last year, and the loans and cash reserves that have kept us afloat these past months are depleted. pic.twitter.com/mI074pigZu

— https://x.com/strandbookstore/status/1319686649798905856

Rapidly Shifting Pandemic Regulations

In a statement regarding the settlement, Bass Wyden emphasized the chaotic nature of the period, noting that federal laws and regulations were “changing rapidly” throughout the public health emergency. She contended that neither the bookstore’s accountant nor the bank managing the application were aware of the specific eligibility updates regarding spouses of members of Congress when the 2021 loan was processed. “The mistake was unintentional, and the funds were returned as soon as the issue came to our attention,” Bass Wyden stated, adding that she regrets the oversight.

The financial stakes for the business were significant during the onset of the pandemic. In October 2020, as lockdowns decimated foot traffic in Manhattan, Bass Wyden publicly appealed for support, noting that the store’s revenue had plummeted by 70%. A subsequent #savethestrand campaign generated over 25,000 online orders in a single weekend, providing a lifeline to the shop founded by Benjamin Bass in 1927. However, the business’s internal management of these relief funds faced scrutiny well before the DOJ settlement. Public records indicate that while the bookstore utilized a 2020 PPP loan to recall 30 of its 188 furloughed employees, it later laid off 12 workers, leading to friction with the store’s labor union.

Strand Bookstore to Pay $1.5 Million After Ineligible Pandemic Loan Settlement — Photo: oregoncapitalchronicle.com

Prosecutors Defend Relief Program Integrity

U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro characterized the enforcement action as a matter of ensuring the integrity of taxpayer-funded relief. “The Paycheck Protection Program was created to save American jobs, not to enrich those who aren’t eligible for taxpayer-funded relief, especially the wife of a U.S. Senator,” Pirro said in a statement. The program, established under the CARES Act, was designed to act as a bridge for small businesses and non-profits, but it was subject to intense oversight as billions of dollars flowed through the economy at unprecedented speed.

For his part, Senator Wyden has maintained distance from the operations of the bookstore. A spokesperson for the senator’s office confirmed that the couple does not discuss the business’s internal affairs and that the Senator had no involvement in either the loan application or the eventual settlement with federal authorities. The resolution of this case marks a quiet end to a saga that highlighted the tension between the necessity of rapid federal economic intervention and the stringent ethical guardrails required for public funds.